Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Boromir88
...And how do you get that support, through your battle experience. For example the successful General Earnil II, or even the Rohan Marshal Eomer...
...I definately would agree, The Black Gate victory got Aragorn the support he needed. Showed everyone he was a capable leader and fighter. Which I ask, do you have to be a "successful" warrior to hold high political office? Boromir was High Warden of the White Tower (I love that fancy title), Elrond and Galadriel have already shown their capabilities...etc.
|
Being a successful general means nothing if you do not possess the loyalty and allegiance of an army to back your claims to any royal station. Historical personnels like Alexander, Julius Caesar and Napoleon Bonaparte understood well that without true military muscle, lineage and popularity meant nothing.
Alexander was able to retain hegemony of the League of Corinth due to his alacrity and the Macedonian Army, Caesar was emperor in all but name because he had the backing of his legions and Bonaparte was in his own words, raised to the imperial seat by his soldiers. It did help that each three were astute demagogues in their own right, but without true military power they would have been nothing.
That said, having an army under your command does not bestow upon you the necessary credentials either. Witness the fate of Albrecht Wallenstein, arguably the best commander of the imperialist forces during the Thirty Years War. With a string of impressive victories under his belt and at times possessing the largest standing army in Europe, this mercenary captain was did in by his own subordinates who were bribed by the imperial seat in Wien. The main cause of his downfall was that unlike the above three, Wallenstein had not made himself indispensable to the army for its own well being. Alexander turned native Macedonian sheep herders and craftsmen into lords of asia, legionnaires that followed Caesar were far wealthier than other plebians of their time and the Grande Armee plundered Europe in a scale that was mindbogging. All three armies understood that without their respective leaders, they could not have enjoyed what they have acquired. This clientele system was the basis of any great military leader with higher aspirations.
As for control of the masses, it is worth noting that the big three at all times governed civilian populations that far out numbered their army or even native population. They keys to their sucesses were reputation, alacrity and astute administration. When Alexander approached Babylon and Persepolis, the inhabitants chose to open their doors to him with the fates of Gaza and Tyre in mind. Ditto for Rome and the other italian cities when Caesar started his civil war campaigns, out of fear of what he did to the Gauls during their revolt and where the Grande Armee marched, the populations dared not resist because of the reputation of Bonaparte and the power of his army. That is the power of reputation, but only enforcible with a strong army to back with. Speed was also a key component in controling the masses because it left them helpless with no options nor united cohesion and history shows that when that happened, the masses yield to pressure. The first two components yield control of the masses to the great captain generals, but to maintain or even increase this grip, good administration was required. The civilain population must be made to believe that they were better off with the conqueror and his army lording over them than the previous occupying power. The answer was to grant thme their needs and later, wants. If the population was starving, feed them. If the population wanted peace, give it to them. And when the bare essentials of social security were in place, try to enhance their standards.
In the case of Aragon II, he had no standing army to back him in a clientele system and so was in a position Wallenstein was in. He procrastinated in entering the center of power which would have given his opponents the time to unite and gather resources to oppose him. And lastly he decided on a battle that was even riskier than Napoleon's 1812 Russian invasion, Alexander's Indian expedition and Caesar's planned attack on Parthia. In all he went against the teachings of the great three and if he was in the real world, he would have suffered a crushing defeat, an ignominious end and eternal condemnation by scholars of history. But hey, it's Tolkiens fantasy! If he wanted Aragon II to sprout wings and fly, the later would.